E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9 was the entry-level option for the Ihagee Exakta line of cameras and cost only 59 Deutschmarks back in 1959. For comparison, another standard Exakta lens – a Biotar 58mm f2 cost six times as much. Given it was considered a cheap lens at a time, I was not expecting too much from this lens.
Nonetheless, I was still curious to try it because the E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9 has only three glass elements in a simple triplet design originating from 1893.
It was the first lens system that allowed elimination of most of the optical distortion or aberration at the outer edge of lenses. The cooke triplet is noted for being able to correct the Seidel aberrations. It is recognized as one of the most important objective designs in the field of photography. – Wikipedia
This particular version has a red V mark, indicating that it is a coated lens.
Opinions about this lens vary a lot from ‘worst lens ever’ to ‘quite good’. I suspect there is a lot of sample-to-sample variation in the quality of the lenses themselves, so being objective here is difficult.
Details / History
Ernst Ludwig was an independent optics manufacturer from East Germany. They made predominantly low-priced lenses, of which the Meritar 50mm f2.9 is most well known and was made from 1949 until 1968.
E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9 specifications
Text: E. Ludwig Meritar 2,9/50 V
Mount: Exakta, M42
Focal length: 50mm
Aperture: f/2.9 – f/16
Aperture blades: 5
Minimum focus distance: 0.7 m
Front filter thread: 35.5mm
Size: 30mm x 56mm
Radioactive: No
Weight: 124g
Made in: East Germany
Optical design: Three elements in three groups (Cooke triplet)
Construction and Handling
E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9 is made of aluminium alloy and glass. However, it does not feel as refined as other Exakta lenses of the time.
Due to the size and proximity of the focus and aperture rings, it is easy to confuse them.
I have noticed that because of the limited overall sharpness focus peaking is not as useful to indicate the focus areas, making it harder to take action shots. My dog moved from me far too many times before I could take a sharp photo of him. In contrast, Carl Zeiss Biotar 58mm f2 has a larger focus ring making it easier to focus.
Focusing distance is also rather long at 70cm. Therefore, close up shots are not possible without an extension tube.
Front filter thread of 35.5mm is unusual and finding accessories for it is therefore difficult.
Radioactivity
Like all lenses, this one did not escape my Geiger counter. Not surprisingly, it does not contain any expensive thorium elements. It may contain lanthanum glass elements, but my Geiger counter is not sensitive enough to detect these.
Price
While this lens is not exactly rare, it is not very common either. There are usually some on eBay, but watch out for the inflated prices, as some dealers try to profit.
It should cost between £25-£40 on eBay UK, or about €30-€50 on eBay Germany. Prices in the USA fluctuate between $50-60 on eBay USA.
Compatibility / Adaptor
It took a while to find a decent Exakta to EOS RF adapter. The first one I tried was Pixco branded, but it did not fit lenses appropriately. Some lenses were loose while others would not rotate and fix into position. Mamiya lenses would refuse to mount at all because the shutter release pin was bumping against the adapter.
After further research, I bought the Kipon branded Exakta to EOS RF, and I can not recommend it enough. Kipon has nailed it! All lenses work well, snap into position and do not wobble. There are no clearance issues with the shutter release pin either. The adapter is well made from smooth quality metal and feels stable on the camera.
Image Quality
I managed to get more beautiful pictures than I expected to get from it during the time that I have been using it. It doesn’t compare to the more expensive lenses which are better in all objective metrics. However, in subjective terms – I do like the distinctive pictures taken with it.
E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9 is a bit more challenging to use and requires a little more thought to ensure it is sufficiently stopped down and not pointing into the sun.
In terms of look, the photos do have a different feel. This lens will leave a signature on the images it produces. They will have a soft distorted outer frame most of the time, even stopped down. But at the same time a beautiful and acceptably sharp centre with enough detail.
Overall, it is a very hit and miss kind of lens, certainly not for everybody.
F2.8 – Unsharp and hazy. Might be suitable for a specific look, but not much else.
F4-5.6 – Gets much sharper.
F8-F11 – Still not very sharp, as compared to Zeiss glass, but usable. Edges still soft.
Pros
- Low price
- Vintage looking photos
- Usable when stopped down
- Cooke triplet lens design
Cons
- Inconvenient aperture and focus rings
- Relatively soft, even stopped down
- The minimum focus distance of 0.7m
Conclusion
I would rate this lens a 2 out of 5. I did expect it to be worse but was left surprised by how usable, albeit temperamental this lens is. If you don’t want to spend too much and want to try an early lens design, then give this lens a try.
Have you tried the E. Ludwig Meritar 50mm f2.9? What do you think about it?
Sample images
I bought one recently in varied lot of equipment. I think it gave quite good results in bright sunny conditions. It is fiddly to use I agree. The Steinhell Munchen Caspar it came with was very soft by comparison and was sold week. At best the Meritar looks nice and antique on camera of similar vintage.
Hi Nick, thank you for the comment!
I have had one previously and due to a house clearout I lost it. However I have a replacement and I can say that I find it useful for portraiture. While not having a fair amount of sharpness. It fits the bill. Not really a lens for getting sharp pictures but it does an excellent job in other areas.
Tenho 2 exemplares dessa lente e gosto muito do resultado vintage que ela entrega. Não acho que a nitidez no centro seja ruim, mas se existe deficiência pra alguns, acredito que seja muito bem compensado no conjunto da entrega.
Google translate translation: “I have 2 copies of this lens and I really like the vintage result it delivers. I don’t think the sharpness in the center is bad, but if there is a deficiency for some, I believe it will be well compensated for in the delivery as a whole.”
I have to thank you for the efforts you’ve put in writing this site.
I’m hoping to view the same high-grade blog posts from you later on as well.
In truth, your creative writing abilities has encouraged me to get my own blog now 😉
I think you people are very hard on poor Meritar. It was the first Exakta-mount lens I bought, for no money at all and I found it quite adequate, even on a Nikon with the diffractive effect of an infinity lens. I have had three in total, of equal quality (for daily use, I don’t shoot charts, nor targets or any other fancy schizophrenic test). I gave the others as a present to friends. I often do that as “You don’t look a gift lens in the diaphragm” ! They are sharp peri-centrally, render colors in a nice way, and their bokeh is OK (like most triplets). True, Trioplan 50 mm is even better in all respects, but it’s not the same league. I’ve found a German technician who designs and constructs adapters with a 3D-printer, allowing all types of old lenses to be used on modern cameras, whatever their FFD (with some restrictions, obviously). He stripped an old Meritar 75 mm with 10 diaphragm blades from a 6×6 folding camera from the fifties, and transformed it into a M42 lens. It is a triplet as well. Great fun to use and the high definition of medium format (identical to Pentacon Six lenses you can adapt). He also has a Meritar 105 mm in petto. I keep an eye on it.
One last comment: you very easily find step-ups from 35,5 mm to 37 mm and, from them on, all accessories are available, cheap (UV filters, polarizers, lens shades …). Another advantage: it makes rotating the front ring so much easier (be it for apertures or for focusing, whichever the case may be). ENJOY!
I’m sorry, the “Meritar” 105 mm is actually a “Victar”, but Ludwig anyway. My mistake.
Since last reading you, I also found another version – M42 this time – with a “striped” design. Not really “zebra” but a bit in the style of the Domiron (which, unfortunately, I don’t own). It is so exquisitely beautiful that you cannot resist buying it. I’m getting older (65 y.o.) and I admit to deriving a lot of pleasure just from the appearance of those marvelous jewels, provided I know they are usable. Any out-of-order lens doesn’t appeal to me (????). Would I qualify as a “lens-peeper” rather than an amateur photographer?
In 1968 I shot a lot of FP4 and CT18 in Spain with the Zebra Meritar and a Meyer 135. When digitizing my stuff recently, unsurprisingly the Meyer scored high (even compared with today’s lenses). I have since used and still use Nikons, Biotar, Tessars and Steinheils, but was surprised by the very acceptable Meritar results, and in some instances had to check my notes to confirm they were from that lens. As your other correspondents suggest: it’s all about the overall image.
Strange you should mention this: I fully agree with you. I use regularly – i.e. every day – a huge number of vintage lenses, some “posh” (Ultron, Quinon, Trioplan 100 …), but most considered “humble”. As I’m 65 years of age, I can boast an ancient experience with argentic photography as well, including work in the dark room.
On digital sensors, and all the “on-board technology” that goes with it in most camera bodies, I have the feeling that there is not ONE single lens that behaves poorly, once you’ve set the right tuning. No need for complicated post-production either. I don’t use Photoshop but just the plain software that comes standard with the PC system. Upon reading many comments on forums (mostly US), where people express very severe appreciations, I wonder at their level of demand. Or else, maybe the specific lens copy they use is poor or faulty. Finally, maybe they are themselves not clever enough to use the gear, simple as it is. Amateur photography is sheer FUN. It makes my day every day of the year …
Loved the depth that you went to on this lens! I bought it in a lot with the Pro Fotodiox Exacta to M adapter that was discontinued, because it was just $50 for both. I didn’t have high hopes for the lens, but it’s so charming! It gives a true vintage look on my 16mp Fuji X camera. It’s soft but in a way that suggests sharpness, which is a characteristic I associate with 35mm film on consumer cameras.
And thanks to you I know I have a Cooke triplet lens now, and that’s pretty damn cool. A piece of optical-photographic history that goes back so much further than the production of these exact lens models.
I own the Meritar, and I just wanted to have a set of triplets (135 mm is still missing…. I had a Triotar, but traded it). I like their weeknesses, making the pictures special. And the Meritar is way better then the Domiplan, which aberates sometimes in a chaotic way. Only thing is the way from near focus to infinity seems to be clockwise, and the Zeiss I use are anticlockwise…. the Meritar is a nice little thing, giving pictures a fine tone while being colorful. I would not trade it. I love it.
Thank you for sharing this, Alexander!
I bought one that was marked C.Z. Jena Tessar 2.8/50 Nr.4159299 with Exakta mount. Have not been able to find this lens in Zeiss information. It is identical to the Meritar. I put an RH adapter on it but have not really tried it since the aperture and focus rings are not designed for fat fingers. Could this be a knock off or did Meritar make some of these for Zeiss?
No, come scritto è uno Zeiss Tessar 50 mm f. 2,8 a 4 lenti. La montatura è simile con passo di filtro 35,5 mm. Questo può fare confondere i due obiettivi.
I was gifted the first version of an Exa with an E. Ludwig Peronar f2.9 50mm lens. It seems to be exactly like the Meritar. Does anyone know anything about this lens? I suspect it is just a Meritar with a different name for marketing purposes. I really can’t find anything on line. I personally have never used the lens. As a collector, I have some Pancolars, Tessars, Xenon and Westrocolors and just naturally throw one of them on when I use that particular camera to be assured of image quality. Plus the Peronar has a really tight focus. Thanks much.
I have to partially disagree with what this review say.
I tell you my story.
I was on my way to put this lens for sale but, having not tried it, I decided to make a few shots on digital using a proper adapter.
I couldn’t believe what I saw : it had more character then a leica summicron, same sharpness, and better bokeh.
I have tested hundreds of lenses in the last years since the core of my photographic artistic research is adapting vintage lenses to modern camera bodies ….. so I think I have large terms of comparison.
In conclusion, I put this lens on the same shelf of my unsellable lenses.
Maybe I was lucky to find an exhtremly good copy …. but guys …. if you find a good copy of this …. keep it ! It’s just priceless.
My judge is 5 stars on 5.
Thank you so much for your input – much appreciated! It helps other people to get a wider perspective about these lenses.